University of Maryland has some tough decisions to make. The department, which is required to be self-sustaining (no money from the general fund; it does receive student fees) is not. Facing major deficits, it now faces the task of cutting teams--many teams--up to 10 according to this WaPo article.
It looks like men's and women's swimming and diving are almost certain to be cut. The university president has formed a commission and asked for a study which will include recommendations for teams to be cut. But the swim teams have caught wind of the news already; so has Bob Groseth, the executive director of the College Swimming Coaches' Association. Some coaches and administrators within the swimming community have been none too happy with Title IX, blaming the law on the elimination of men's swim teams.
But Groseth, whatever he thinks about Title IX, makes this observation about swimming in DI:
As you see with all this conference [realignment], there is a growing number of athletic directors who are using athletic departments as a bottom-line business model — not as part of an overall education model.
He notes that swimming has grown at the DII and DIII levels, though.
And it's true. UMD is in a big-time conference (ACC) playing big-time sports and they now seem to have no choice but to make similar decisions as other big-time programs--cutting the so-called minor sports.
It's going to be a tough year for UMD athletics--at least morale-wise--as rumors swirl and campaigns begin to save sports.
Showing posts with label University of Maryland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label University of Maryland. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Will Maryland be the next to cut sports?
Hopefully not, says athletic director Deborah Yow. But despite early predictions that the recession is over, the University of Maryland is exploring all scenarios that would enable to survive the current economic crisis.
A recent report has outlined possibilities for keeping the department financially stable enough while remaining successful throughout the coming years of potential hardship. The report includes suggestions for increasing revenues--always the first, through arguably most difficult, task. It is also one that includes reducing expenses. A second option is to scale back on select sports. And the final is the elimination of teams.
But with 27 teams--5 more than the ACC average--the "last resort" option is definitely a possibility if options one and two do not produce the intended results.
The report commented on Maryland's commitment to gender equity. No details on how that commitment might manifest in the above options. But we have to remember that, in Title IX circles, the Maryland athletic department is most (in)famous for making competitive cheerleading an intercollegiate sport despite the fact that it is not an NCAA-recognized sport. And despite the fact that there were other viable women's club teams that could have been elevated to varsity status.
We will have to wait to see how Maryland does both in managing its economic woes and meeting gender equity requirements.
A recent report has outlined possibilities for keeping the department financially stable enough while remaining successful throughout the coming years of potential hardship. The report includes suggestions for increasing revenues--always the first, through arguably most difficult, task. It is also one that includes reducing expenses. A second option is to scale back on select sports. And the final is the elimination of teams.
But with 27 teams--5 more than the ACC average--the "last resort" option is definitely a possibility if options one and two do not produce the intended results.
The report commented on Maryland's commitment to gender equity. No details on how that commitment might manifest in the above options. But we have to remember that, in Title IX circles, the Maryland athletic department is most (in)famous for making competitive cheerleading an intercollegiate sport despite the fact that it is not an NCAA-recognized sport. And despite the fact that there were other viable women's club teams that could have been elevated to varsity status.
We will have to wait to see how Maryland does both in managing its economic woes and meeting gender equity requirements.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Increasingly, College Housing Offers Gender Neutral Option
The Baltimore Sun reported yesterday on the increasing number of gender-neutral housing options being offered by colleges and universities. The article focuses on pilot programs underway and in the works at Goucher College, UMBC, and University of Maryland College Park, while noting that around 25 colleges (UConn among them, we've previously noted) offer students a coed living experience.
Proponents of such programs explain that some students are as comfortable, if not more so, living with members of the opposite sex, so making them choose same-sex apartment-mates seems like an "artificial barrier." Coed housing options also makes good business sense for colleges that compete with an off-campus housing market, where coed living among students is common. Last, the coed alternative is a compassionate accommodation for transgendered students, for whom living in a dorm or apartment designated for one sex or the other could be an uncomfortable (or controversial) experience.
Yet while many colleges and universities prohibit coed living, some actually require it -- for married students, that is. Last week a gay couple sued the University of Hawaii after their application to live in married student housing was denied. It's clear that many universities still order their students living arrangements around the outmoded assumptions that men and women living separately before marriage and in opposite-sex couples after marriage. The coed housing movement is helping to change this rigid, heteronormative paradigm.
Proponents of such programs explain that some students are as comfortable, if not more so, living with members of the opposite sex, so making them choose same-sex apartment-mates seems like an "artificial barrier." Coed housing options also makes good business sense for colleges that compete with an off-campus housing market, where coed living among students is common. Last, the coed alternative is a compassionate accommodation for transgendered students, for whom living in a dorm or apartment designated for one sex or the other could be an uncomfortable (or controversial) experience.
Yet while many colleges and universities prohibit coed living, some actually require it -- for married students, that is. Last week a gay couple sued the University of Hawaii after their application to live in married student housing was denied. It's clear that many universities still order their students living arrangements around the outmoded assumptions that men and women living separately before marriage and in opposite-sex couples after marriage. The coed housing movement is helping to change this rigid, heteronormative paradigm.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Some Thoughts on Competitive Cheer
As we have written about in the past, the sport of competitive cheerleading exists at both the college and high school level. To be clear, "competitive cheer" is not the same as sideline cheer, which is, for Title IX purposes, a form of publicity and promotion. But when a cheerleading squad exists for the sole purpose of training and competing against other squads throughout a regular season, it is considered by many -- including OCR, under the right circumstances -- to be a sport, entitled to all of the benefits that other sports receive. This development is controversial, however. Many have a hard time taking competitive cheer seriously -- both because it's a sport where the winner is not determined by a scoreboard or a time clock (though it's certainly not the first sport to rely on subjective scoring system), and because it invokes by association the gender stereotypes perpetuated by traditional sideline cheerleading.
Both high school and college cheer were in the news this week, inspiring me to offer some reflections on this new sport. First, there was this article in the Baltimore Sun, which profiled the competitive cheer squad at the University of Maryland. Maryland is the first, and currently only, college to offer competitive cheer as a sport. Oregon will be joining them next year. However, the article points to some evidence that this isn't necessarily the beginning of a trend. OCR ensures that schools aren't passing off their existing sideline cheerleaders as athletes under Title IX, which means schools actually have to spend money on competitive cheer, like any other sport -- a big deterrent. Additionally, one source suggested that while cheerleading squads might enjoy the occasional competition, they are reluctant to give up their sideline role, as going competitive would require.
I got a difference sense on the viability of competitive cheer by reading this column in the St. Petersburg Times. Author John Cotey reported on the inaugural Florida state championship in competitive cheer, which involved 175 schools and nearly 4,000 (all female) athletes. He made it clear while he personally doesn't fully embrace the sport -- pointing out that "bright red lipstick was apparently required," that "athletes were in curlers...[and] ribbons were part of the uniform" -- he ultimately comes out in favor competitive cheer, emphasizing that despite the spectacle (DJs, airbrushed souvenir t-shirts, roses and corsages for sale) the competition was serious. His account suggests that high school competitive cheer is, at least in Florida, a viable, sport that is catching on, and producing potential future college participants.
If competitive cheer is really catching on, the question women's sports proponents will have to ask is whether a sport that incorporates "lipstick, ribbons, and curlers" can coexist with those women's sports that challenge gender stereotypes and broaden the scope of what society considers appropriately feminine appearance, behavior, and activity. Some might say there is already pressure on female athletes to emphasize traditionally feminine appearance without embracing a sport that seems to require it. At the same time, those of us who are questioning the validity of competitive cheer should be careful not to let our paradigm of sport be limited by its traditional definitions, which were, historically speaking, created by men. Competitive cheer might represent an opportunity to expand the definition of sport, however slightly, from its patriarchal origins. I don't have a final answer, but I'm open to the possibility of competitive cheer as a feminist project.
Both high school and college cheer were in the news this week, inspiring me to offer some reflections on this new sport. First, there was this article in the Baltimore Sun, which profiled the competitive cheer squad at the University of Maryland. Maryland is the first, and currently only, college to offer competitive cheer as a sport. Oregon will be joining them next year. However, the article points to some evidence that this isn't necessarily the beginning of a trend. OCR ensures that schools aren't passing off their existing sideline cheerleaders as athletes under Title IX, which means schools actually have to spend money on competitive cheer, like any other sport -- a big deterrent. Additionally, one source suggested that while cheerleading squads might enjoy the occasional competition, they are reluctant to give up their sideline role, as going competitive would require.
I got a difference sense on the viability of competitive cheer by reading this column in the St. Petersburg Times. Author John Cotey reported on the inaugural Florida state championship in competitive cheer, which involved 175 schools and nearly 4,000 (all female) athletes. He made it clear while he personally doesn't fully embrace the sport -- pointing out that "bright red lipstick was apparently required," that "athletes were in curlers...[and] ribbons were part of the uniform" -- he ultimately comes out in favor competitive cheer, emphasizing that despite the spectacle (DJs, airbrushed souvenir t-shirts, roses and corsages for sale) the competition was serious. His account suggests that high school competitive cheer is, at least in Florida, a viable, sport that is catching on, and producing potential future college participants.
If competitive cheer is really catching on, the question women's sports proponents will have to ask is whether a sport that incorporates "lipstick, ribbons, and curlers" can coexist with those women's sports that challenge gender stereotypes and broaden the scope of what society considers appropriately feminine appearance, behavior, and activity. Some might say there is already pressure on female athletes to emphasize traditionally feminine appearance without embracing a sport that seems to require it. At the same time, those of us who are questioning the validity of competitive cheer should be careful not to let our paradigm of sport be limited by its traditional definitions, which were, historically speaking, created by men. Competitive cheer might represent an opportunity to expand the definition of sport, however slightly, from its patriarchal origins. I don't have a final answer, but I'm open to the possibility of competitive cheer as a feminist project.
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Top ten of 2007
[This was promised two days ago but, well, it just didn't happen. Please don't hold it against it us. We promise it does not an indication of a pattern in the new year.]
Below are what we saw as the top ten Title IX stories of the year. As Ebuz noted to a reporter from Inside HigherEd not too long ago, it was a good year to be a Title IX plaintiff. You will see this reflected below, but other events were pivotal as well. The list is in no particular order--we could say it's because we here at the Title IX Blog don't like to hierarchize, but really it's impossible to figure out what was the most significant story of the year. There were so many times this year we just found ourselves saying to one another: "No way. Really?" And in a good way.
1. University of Colorado settles sexual harassment case with two former students who accused the university--now with a new president and athletic director--of failing to do enough to remedy the situation with football recruit parties that lead to their sexual assaults. We expect to see a very positive ripple effect from this case in future sexual harassment cases.
2. All things Fresno State. Three cases of discrimination, three wins (we consider settlement a win in this situation). Great record for Title IX--not so good for Fresno State, California taxpayers, and university president John Welty who we predict (because it is the time of year for making predictions) will not make it through 2008 in his current position. We also predict that as exciting as Stacy Johnson-Klein's $19.1 million jury award was--it will not stand up. We expect a reduction in the amount and hope Fresno does not push for a new trial. And though the cases of Lindy Vivas, Diane Milutinovich and Johnson-Klein seem to have reached the denouement, don't expect 2008 to be a good time for Fresno State. An assistant in the athletic department filed a discrimination suit at the end of 2007. We will have to wait and see what Fresno learned this past year as they approach this new charge of discrimination.
3. The anniversary. 2007 marked the 35th anniversary of the legislation and it seemed every media outlet in the country (and beyond) covered it some way. It was all very celebratory and certainly we celebrated too, but much of this coverage failed to critically address the backlash against Title IX. Luckily there were plenty of opportunities this year to correct all the misinformation about the law that came from sports writers, non-sports writers, television commentators, bloggers, and people with all sorts of opinions. But the anniversary also provided a great opportunity for assessment and discourse about the future. We were excited to be a small part of this conversation not only on this blog but at events like the Girls and Women Rock Conference in Cleveland last April.
4. Jennifer Harris v. Rene Portland. The lawsuit got settled; the terms and gathered evidence were sealed, but we heard things here and there and read between the lines and generally were pleased. Then we were even more pleased when Portland resigned shortly after the season ended. Jennifer Harris deserves the utmost respect and many thanks for being the first person to stand up to Portland's racist, sexist, and homophobic behavior.
5. Florida Gulf Coast University. Pat Griffin has dubbed FGCU "Fresno east." Not a nickname you want to have hanging around your athletic department as it tries to become a more serious contender in DI athletics. What FGCU might learn from Fresno is hard to discern right now. The administration does not seem to think it is, in any way, in the wrong in its treatment of female coaches, very few of whom actually remain at the school. But just like their counterparts across the country, these women are fighting back. And they are making homophobia a more salient issue in the discussion of their treatment.
6. UNC's Anson Dorrance is going to stand trial for sexual harassment. This case has been ongoing for years, but in April, assuming no settlement is reached (which is a big assumption given the precedent that seems to have been set in 2007) head soccer coach Dorrance will finally have to answer for his treatment of his players and the sexualized atmosphere he created on the team.
7. Cheerleading. Yep. We wrote about cheerleading a fair amount this year given it is not even an NCAA-approved sport. This did not stop University of Oregon, though, from creating only the second varsity-level competitive cheer program in the country (after Maryland). The addition of a non-sanctioned sport alone would have created some controversy (as it has at UMD) but the decision to add competitive cheer just as Oregon was cutting wrestling (and simultaneously reinstating baseball) created quite a stir. Things may have settled a bit at Oregon but the issue of competitive cheer as sport that counts toward Title IX compliance is not likely to go away soon and, though it may not happen this year, I would not be surprised to see a lawsuit brought by a club sport player whose team did not get elevated to varsity status because cheerleading did.
The other big cheerleading news was at the high school level where most cheer teams are not considered sports but rather constitute support for sports teams. This means, under Title IX, if you provide such support to your boys' teams, you must do so for your girls' teams. This was the issue at hand in New York, when a mother of a female basketball player protested the lack of cheerleaders at the girls' games and their constant presence on the boys' sidelines. And despite our awareness of entrenched gender norms in this society, we were a little surprised at the backlash engendered by the mandate for equal amounts of cheering that seemed to stem largely from a general feeling that girls should not be cheering for other girls.
8. Softball fields. It is not much of an exaggeration to say that we found about a story almost every week about the condition of softball fields. Most came out of high schools, but a few were about college fields as well. Parents, players, concerned citizens have been filing complaints about how the inferior fields are a violation of Title IX. Why softball fields? They are a very tangible measure of compliance. Look at the baseball field; look at the softball field. Are there lights, concession stands, same level of maintenance, outright ownership, suitable dugouts, fences, bleachers, etc. on both fields? It is difficult to defend a softball field that is lacking in any of these things when the field used by the baseball team has them. And that is why so many softball fields across the country this year got some major face lifts.
9. Seasons of change in Michigan. It finally ended. The case against the Michigan High School Athletic Association ended last April when the Supreme Court denied the organization cert. This has meant that the lower court's decision that MHSAA was in violation of Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause in its scheduling of girls' sports out of their traditional seasons has stood. Michigan high schools have had to change their schedules accordingly. The controversy this case created was enormous and the incivility of the discussions was disheartening. We hope that 2008 is the proverbial calm after the storm and that everyone is working more willingly than not toward dealing effectively with the scheduling changes.
10. Boosters. Almost as ubiquitous as the stories about softball fields were the stories about booster club funds. Yes, money raised by booster clubs must be considered in the quest for equitable support of girls' and boys' teams. High schools in Pennsylvania and California are addressing and accounting for booster club funds right now. More stories like this and the other ones we covered this year are likely to emerge in the coming year.
Below are what we saw as the top ten Title IX stories of the year. As Ebuz noted to a reporter from Inside HigherEd not too long ago, it was a good year to be a Title IX plaintiff. You will see this reflected below, but other events were pivotal as well. The list is in no particular order--we could say it's because we here at the Title IX Blog don't like to hierarchize, but really it's impossible to figure out what was the most significant story of the year. There were so many times this year we just found ourselves saying to one another: "No way. Really?" And in a good way.
1. University of Colorado settles sexual harassment case with two former students who accused the university--now with a new president and athletic director--of failing to do enough to remedy the situation with football recruit parties that lead to their sexual assaults. We expect to see a very positive ripple effect from this case in future sexual harassment cases.
2. All things Fresno State. Three cases of discrimination, three wins (we consider settlement a win in this situation). Great record for Title IX--not so good for Fresno State, California taxpayers, and university president John Welty who we predict (because it is the time of year for making predictions) will not make it through 2008 in his current position. We also predict that as exciting as Stacy Johnson-Klein's $19.1 million jury award was--it will not stand up. We expect a reduction in the amount and hope Fresno does not push for a new trial. And though the cases of Lindy Vivas, Diane Milutinovich and Johnson-Klein seem to have reached the denouement, don't expect 2008 to be a good time for Fresno State. An assistant in the athletic department filed a discrimination suit at the end of 2007. We will have to wait and see what Fresno learned this past year as they approach this new charge of discrimination.
3. The anniversary. 2007 marked the 35th anniversary of the legislation and it seemed every media outlet in the country (and beyond) covered it some way. It was all very celebratory and certainly we celebrated too, but much of this coverage failed to critically address the backlash against Title IX. Luckily there were plenty of opportunities this year to correct all the misinformation about the law that came from sports writers, non-sports writers, television commentators, bloggers, and people with all sorts of opinions. But the anniversary also provided a great opportunity for assessment and discourse about the future. We were excited to be a small part of this conversation not only on this blog but at events like the Girls and Women Rock Conference in Cleveland last April.
4. Jennifer Harris v. Rene Portland. The lawsuit got settled; the terms and gathered evidence were sealed, but we heard things here and there and read between the lines and generally were pleased. Then we were even more pleased when Portland resigned shortly after the season ended. Jennifer Harris deserves the utmost respect and many thanks for being the first person to stand up to Portland's racist, sexist, and homophobic behavior.
5. Florida Gulf Coast University. Pat Griffin has dubbed FGCU "Fresno east." Not a nickname you want to have hanging around your athletic department as it tries to become a more serious contender in DI athletics. What FGCU might learn from Fresno is hard to discern right now. The administration does not seem to think it is, in any way, in the wrong in its treatment of female coaches, very few of whom actually remain at the school. But just like their counterparts across the country, these women are fighting back. And they are making homophobia a more salient issue in the discussion of their treatment.
6. UNC's Anson Dorrance is going to stand trial for sexual harassment. This case has been ongoing for years, but in April, assuming no settlement is reached (which is a big assumption given the precedent that seems to have been set in 2007) head soccer coach Dorrance will finally have to answer for his treatment of his players and the sexualized atmosphere he created on the team.
7. Cheerleading. Yep. We wrote about cheerleading a fair amount this year given it is not even an NCAA-approved sport. This did not stop University of Oregon, though, from creating only the second varsity-level competitive cheer program in the country (after Maryland). The addition of a non-sanctioned sport alone would have created some controversy (as it has at UMD) but the decision to add competitive cheer just as Oregon was cutting wrestling (and simultaneously reinstating baseball) created quite a stir. Things may have settled a bit at Oregon but the issue of competitive cheer as sport that counts toward Title IX compliance is not likely to go away soon and, though it may not happen this year, I would not be surprised to see a lawsuit brought by a club sport player whose team did not get elevated to varsity status because cheerleading did.
The other big cheerleading news was at the high school level where most cheer teams are not considered sports but rather constitute support for sports teams. This means, under Title IX, if you provide such support to your boys' teams, you must do so for your girls' teams. This was the issue at hand in New York, when a mother of a female basketball player protested the lack of cheerleaders at the girls' games and their constant presence on the boys' sidelines. And despite our awareness of entrenched gender norms in this society, we were a little surprised at the backlash engendered by the mandate for equal amounts of cheering that seemed to stem largely from a general feeling that girls should not be cheering for other girls.
8. Softball fields. It is not much of an exaggeration to say that we found about a story almost every week about the condition of softball fields. Most came out of high schools, but a few were about college fields as well. Parents, players, concerned citizens have been filing complaints about how the inferior fields are a violation of Title IX. Why softball fields? They are a very tangible measure of compliance. Look at the baseball field; look at the softball field. Are there lights, concession stands, same level of maintenance, outright ownership, suitable dugouts, fences, bleachers, etc. on both fields? It is difficult to defend a softball field that is lacking in any of these things when the field used by the baseball team has them. And that is why so many softball fields across the country this year got some major face lifts.
9. Seasons of change in Michigan. It finally ended. The case against the Michigan High School Athletic Association ended last April when the Supreme Court denied the organization cert. This has meant that the lower court's decision that MHSAA was in violation of Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause in its scheduling of girls' sports out of their traditional seasons has stood. Michigan high schools have had to change their schedules accordingly. The controversy this case created was enormous and the incivility of the discussions was disheartening. We hope that 2008 is the proverbial calm after the storm and that everyone is working more willingly than not toward dealing effectively with the scheduling changes.
10. Boosters. Almost as ubiquitous as the stories about softball fields were the stories about booster club funds. Yes, money raised by booster clubs must be considered in the quest for equitable support of girls' and boys' teams. High schools in Pennsylvania and California are addressing and accounting for booster club funds right now. More stories like this and the other ones we covered this year are likely to emerge in the coming year.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
UMD and competitive cheer
Last week I attended the North American Society for the Sociology of Sport Conference where a lot of interesting work is being presented--including some on Title IX. A contingent of UMaryland folks, grad students Sarah Olson and Jaime Ryan and Professor Jaime Schultz, presented on competitive cheerleading. They, of course, have a unique opportunity to examine how competitive cheer has been implemented given that Maryland was the first, and until Oregon recently, the only school to elevate competitive cheer to varsity status.
The group's future plans with the project include interviewing administrators and cheerleaders and I imagine will address some of the key issues: is cheerleading a sport? is it an activity that promotes women's physical activity? is it in keeping with the spirit of Title IX? is this elevation of cheering to varsity sport status a trend--and is it one advocates of women's sports will be forced to either embrace or speak out against?
The UMD grad students in the Physical Cultural Studies program also have a blog worth checking out called The Corpus about a variety of issues regarding sport and physical culture.
The group's future plans with the project include interviewing administrators and cheerleaders and I imagine will address some of the key issues: is cheerleading a sport? is it an activity that promotes women's physical activity? is it in keeping with the spirit of Title IX? is this elevation of cheering to varsity sport status a trend--and is it one advocates of women's sports will be forced to either embrace or speak out against?
The UMD grad students in the Physical Cultural Studies program also have a blog worth checking out called The Corpus about a variety of issues regarding sport and physical culture.
Monday, October 8, 2007
Students Challenge University of Maryland's Clothesline Project Policy
Last week, University of Maryland officials announced that students participating in the semiannual Clothesline Project could not write the full names of sexual assailants on the T-shirts that will be hung around campus. The Clothesline Project takes place in hundreds of communities and campuses around the country each year to raise awareness about sexual violence against women and to promote healing among survivors. A participant will decorate a T-shirt that represents an event of sexual violence against herself or another woman, and local organizers will collect the T-shirts and display them together on clotheslines.
Student organizers and supporters of the Clothesline Project at the University of Maryland are protesting the University's policy against naming assailants. The University's fraternities joined together in a letter of support for the Clothesline Project organizers and objection to the ban, while organizers are considering seeking an injunction against the University. If they do pursue legal action, they have indicated that they will argue that the policy violates Title IX because of its disparate impact on women.
If this controversy were to reach a judge, I think it would be difficult for the University's opponents to prevail on a Title IX claim. I think a judge would be persuaded that the University is limiting victims rights for a permissible, nondiscriminatory purpose, that of avoiding libeling individuals whose names appear on the shirts but who have not been convicted of assault. Notably, the founding Clothesline Project advises local organizers to encourage participants "not to name their perpetrators by both the first and last name unless they have been convicted of that particular crime" for this very reason. University officials would probably also argue that the policy against naming is the least discriminatory means of accomplishing this purpose, as it still leaves open the opportunity for victims to name and challenge their assailants through the University's disciplinary process.
Interestingly, one student who opposes the ban suggests that the University is responding to two specific shirts that have been included in past Clothesline Projects in College Park that name football players, one of whom plays for Maryland. Even if the University feels confident in the legality of its position, it may strike some kind of compromise with the Clothesline Project to avoid giving the appearance that it is silencing a victim of sexual assault in order to protect a football player.
Student organizers and supporters of the Clothesline Project at the University of Maryland are protesting the University's policy against naming assailants. The University's fraternities joined together in a letter of support for the Clothesline Project organizers and objection to the ban, while organizers are considering seeking an injunction against the University. If they do pursue legal action, they have indicated that they will argue that the policy violates Title IX because of its disparate impact on women.
If this controversy were to reach a judge, I think it would be difficult for the University's opponents to prevail on a Title IX claim. I think a judge would be persuaded that the University is limiting victims rights for a permissible, nondiscriminatory purpose, that of avoiding libeling individuals whose names appear on the shirts but who have not been convicted of assault. Notably, the founding Clothesline Project advises local organizers to encourage participants "not to name their perpetrators by both the first and last name unless they have been convicted of that particular crime" for this very reason. University officials would probably also argue that the policy against naming is the least discriminatory means of accomplishing this purpose, as it still leaves open the opportunity for victims to name and challenge their assailants through the University's disciplinary process.
Interestingly, one student who opposes the ban suggests that the University is responding to two specific shirts that have been included in past Clothesline Projects in College Park that name football players, one of whom plays for Maryland. Even if the University feels confident in the legality of its position, it may strike some kind of compromise with the Clothesline Project to avoid giving the appearance that it is silencing a victim of sexual assault in order to protect a football player.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
