Posted by IrvineDevil on May 14, 08 at 12:27:43:
There seems to be a little confusion regarding Title IX, so here is an over simplified explanation:
Title IX requires that women be afforded the same athletic opportunities as men are afforded. A benchmark for this is what is known as the "substantially proportionate" requirement. In other words, if 2% of the male student body as a whole is afforded athletic opportunities, then 2% of the female student body should get opportunities as well.
At ASU the student population is approximately 50-50 male to female (it might actually favor females a little bit). As such, the effect is that there should be the same number of athletic opportunities for women as there are for men, if not more. However, an AZ Republic article reports that there are 311 male athletes, while only 222 female athletes.
Although, ASU would not pass Title IX requirements by this standard, there is an exception if it can be demonstrated that the school has a "history and continuing practice of expansion" of opportunities for females. ASU can demonstrate this by the addition of women's water polo. However, ASU cannot rely on that expansion forever – it must be able to demonstrate the "continuing practice" part over time.
As a result, ASU would need to add more opportunities for women, which would cost money – which the Athletic Department apparently doesn't have, nor feels that it can raise - or alternatively, and unfortunately, reduce the number of athletic opportunities for men, so that the ratio is "substantially proportionate". Unfortunately, the Athletic Department has chosen to go with the latter by cutting 3 mens sports.
More disheartening is that at some point most schools can no longer afford to add additional opportunities for women (the true intent of the legislation), and must instead cut opportunities for men in order to stay in Title IX compliance. On the whole, however, Title IX has certainly provided a greater number of opportunities for women than it has taken from men - at least to this point. Time will tell if that holds true in the future.