Men's love for sports can't be described as anything short of a child's love for his teddy bear: genuine and obsessive. Should people take away from the enjoyment of both male athletes and their fans? Of course not. However, Title IX supporters seem to want to do just that.

Since 1972, male athletic programs all across the country have been undergoing enormous changes. Athletes and their spectators have been devastated as high schools and colleges have tried to comply with the laws established under Title IX. In this document it is stated that no individual can be discriminated against on the basis of sex while participating in any educational activity receiving federal aid. As a result, athletic programs in schools have been forced to deal with proportionality and meeting a gender quota.

From a business perspective, men's athletics are one of the largest sources of income for a school. Men's sporting competitions bring in crowds that are far larger than those at women's events, leading to greater success in ticket sales.

Since men's sports bring in the most money, it is only logical that the money that comes from their games is recirculated back into the men's programs. After all, they made it, didn't they

Over the past thirty years, nearly four hundred men's low-profile sports teams (like wrestling, swimming, golf, and gymnastics) have been stripped of funding and support from their sponsored schools, ultimately crushing the hopes and dreams of male athletes ever hoping to compete at the collegiate or Olympic level.

The football team of St. John's University in New York City was recently cut from the school's athletic program as a result of Title IX. After the school realized that it hadn't reached its quota of female athletes, it worked on recruiting more, and raising the female enrollment to fifty-eight percent. However the school could not afford to keep all of its new female players along with its sixty football players. To avoid lawsuits, the school chose the politically correct way out, picking the female players over the male players and eventually cut the football team.

It is absurd that athletic departments are making the decisions to keep teams at schools based solely on the need to maintain a balanced male-to-female ratio at the school. That's not the way things should happen. It's almost as if reverse discrimination has swept the country as colleges have tried to reach that "balance."

So much complexity surrounds Title IX that even the Bush administration has taken note. At the moment, it is trying to curtail enforcement of the law. The past thirty years under the Title IX regulations have given us, as well as our nation's leaders, the opportunity to compare life with and without gender equality. Should we keep Title IX, or reverse it? The answer to this can be summed up in one question: Which answer is actually fair?